MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409036851 · doi:10.1016/j.ajpc.2025.100978

Recognition and management of persistent chylomicronemia: A joint expert clinical consensus by the National Lipid Association and the American Society for Preventive Cardiology

2025· article· en· W4409036851 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Preventive Cardiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipid metabolism and disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of HealthJohns Hopkins UniversityAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Chylomicronemia is currently categorized only as familial (FCS) or multifactorial (MCS). • Chylomicronemia can be categorized by TG course as intermittent or persistent (PC). • Most chylomicronemia cases can be managed with lifestyle changes and conventional drugs. • Patients with PC and alarm features have a very high risk of acute pancreatitis, similar to FCS. • Patients with PC and very high risk may need novel therapies like apoC-III inhibitors. Extreme hypertriglyceridemia, defined as triglyceride (TG) levels ≥1000 mg/dL, is almost always indicative of chylomicronemia. The current diagnostic approach categorizes individuals with chylomicronemia into familial chylomicronemia syndrome (FCS; prevalence 1–10 per million), caused by the biallelic combination of pathogenic variants that impair the lipolytic action of lipoprotein lipase (LPL), or multifactorial chylomicronemia syndrome (MCS, 1 in 500). A pragmatic framework should emphasize the severity of the phenotype and the risk of complications. Therefore, we endorse the term “persistent chylomicronemia” defined as TG ≥1000 mg/dL in more than half of the measurements to encompass patients with the highest risk for pancreatitis, regardless of their genetic predisposition. We suggest classification of PC into four subtypes: 1) genetic FCS, 2) clinical FCS, 3) PC with “alarm” features, and 4) PC without alarm features. Although patients with FCS most likely have PC, the vast majority with PC do not have genetic FCS. Proposed alarm features are: (a) history of recurrent TG-induced acute pancreatitis, (b) recurrent hospitalizations for severe abdominal pain without another identified cause, (c) childhood pancreatitis, (d) family history of TG-induced pancreatitis, and/or (e) post-heparin LPL activity <20 % of normal value. Alarm features constitute the strongest risk factors for future acute pancreatitis risk. Patients with PC and alarm features have very high risk of pancreatitis, comparable to that in patients with FCS. Effective, innovative treatments for PC, like apoC-III inhibitors, have been developed. Combined with lifestyle modifications, these agents markedly lower TG levels and risk of pancreatitis in the very-high-risk groups, irrespective of the monogenic etiology. Pragmatic definitions, education, and focus on patients with PC specifically those with alarm features could help mitigate the risk of acute pancreatitis and other complications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.604
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it